/korea/ - 한국

I'd like to think it could happen. I'm not from there so I don't have a real vested interest in it, but it's a sad state of affairs that I wish could change.

If it's true that North Korea hates everyone as much as people say they do, I don't see how it could happen without another country actually taking them over. Given the way things go in the world, it would be the USA taking control of North Korea and then giving it to South Korea, which would not be the happy reunion I'd like to see.

South Korea being so westernized seems like a big problem too, I wouldn't want to reunite with a country either if there was some question about whether they were being controlled by the west.

>The ministry also said the elimination of the North Korean risk factor would result in increased offshore investment and South Korea would benefit in the long term from mineral resources in the North.

It really sucks that if they do reunite, the only motivation will be financial. They don't seem to care about the history that was thrown away or the families that were separated. It'll probably be more of an annexation than a reunification.

Even if they manage to bring on reunification on a political level, the economic costs would be tremendous. The reunification of Germany required 2 trillion euros over a span of 20 years (and large part of eastern Germany are still economic wasteland plagued by unemployment and emigration of the youth), and that will only be a fracture of what the reunification of Korea would cost, considering that North Korea more or less stopped economic development around the late 60s, if not worse.

Then there's the question how a reunification would look like - getting both Korean states to accept the necessary steps is one thing, but what about the USA vis a vis China?

>>59
^ knows what he is talking about. Many people look to German reunification when they think about Korean reunification, and it's important to do so, but it can't even come close to comparing to the difficulties and cost involved with Korean reunification.

What do anons think of the actual DPRK proposal put forward by Kim Il Sung in the early 1980s? Apparently it's what the government still upholds.

"President Kim Il Sung advanced a plan for founding the Democratic Confederal Republic of Koryo at the Sixth Congress of the Workers' Party of Korea in October Juche 69 (1980).

He stated that the most realistic and reasonable way to reunify the country independently, peacefully and on the principle of great national unity was to draw the north and south together into a confederal state, leaving the ideas and social systems existing in the north and south as they were. He therefore proposed a new plan to reunify the country by founding a confederal republic through the establishment of a unified national government on condition that the north and the south recognize and tolerate each other's ideas and social system, a government in which the two sides are represented on an equal footing and under which they exercise regional autonomy respectively with equal rights and duties.

He recommended that in the unified state of a confederal type a supreme national confederal assembly should be formed with an equal number of representatives from north and south and an appropriate number of representatives of overseas nationals and that this assembly should organize a confederal standing committee to guide the regional governments of the north and south and to administer all affairs of the confederal state.

He added that it would be a good idea to call the confederal state the Democratic Confederal Republic of Koryo.

The DCRK should be a neutral country which does not participate in any political, military alliance or bloc. As a unified state, embracing the whole of the territory and people of the country, it should pursue a policy which agrees with the fundamental interests and demands of the entire Korean people."

For more detail see: http://www1.korea-np.co.jp/pk/027th_issue/98012104.htm

>>88
Honestly, I think it's just wishful thinking. I have heard of that idea though, because it is still talked about to this day.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/federalizing-the-korean-peninsula-north-korea-calls-for-unifying-confederation-with-south-korea/5390139

Not to mention that the South's economy is much larger than the North's and its population is much greater, so why should they be put on equal footing? I don't want to see North Korea exist at all. If their political system is still in a state of survival, no matter if they are independent or part of a federation, I think it is a failure of humanity. I want the North and the South to be reunified under the South so that those in North Korea can actually experience life in a system that doesn't fuck them over quite as much.

>>97

Problem is that China would never allow this. They feel rather uncomfortable to have strong ally if not vassal of the United States right on their door step; being neighbors with Japan is already bad enough.

On the other hand, the relationship between China and the US has changed dramatically over the last few years, as has that of China and North Korea. So while I would be willing to guarantee that we won't see a unification within this or the next decade, saying the same in fifty or more years might be more complicated.

>>88
That's kind of a cool idea, I wondered if anyone had ever proposed both countries operating together with different governments. It'd be a fascinating experiment.

>>126
If I was going to place a bet on the actual method of reunification, it would be war. All it would take is North Korea to finally open blatant hostilities with us or with South Korea, for us to destroy them and force a democracy

I was just scrolling through the book this anon posted here
>>69
And found a part talking about Kim Il Sung's reunification thoughts
https://ia601404.us.archive.org/3/items/ModernHistoryOfKorea/Modern%20History%20of%20Korea.pdf
>Page 512

>>134

We already had the exact same bloody scenario in the Korea war. Long story short, if the US or even just South Korea invades North Korea, China will intervene and try to push back the Allied influence. Not to speak of the economic disaster if China tells the US economy to go fuck itself (and vice versa). Russia probably would side with China, as well - not so much because of all the Soviet garbage, but simply to piss off the US.

The fact that both superpowers supporting the respective parties in the conflicts got more nukes than would be necessary to fuck up the entire planet doesn't help.

>>146
Are they different from the 1980 proposal? Keep in mind the book came out in 1979.

>>158
China back then was very different than the China of today. There is no way in the world that China would back North Korea in a war against the US today. They have been sliding back their support for North Korea for a while now, while still not openly declaring that they no longer support them at all. Their economy relies heavily on the US. Not only would it be economic suicide, it could possibly be suicide period, as nuclear armed countries would be involved, as you pointed out.

>>177

You forget that this is a game of two players. As much as China economically depends on the US, the US in turn depends on China, and also has its own little arsenal of nukes (though probably a lot less than the US).

As far as it regards China's relationship with North Korea - my point isn't really that China cares an awful lot about Korea, the Chinese government simply would be extremely uncomfortable with a US-controlled (or at least heavily pro-US) state directly on its boarders. If it wasn't for this, I dare to say China would have dropped North Korea long ago. An actual interesting scenario would be China itself "liberating" North Korea - even considering China is not exactly a paradise, I suppose it would be better than the current regime.

It would be awesome. It would just be like the reunification of Silla, Baekje and Goguryeo in Korean history.